• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Big Brother
Aaron's Ejection Had NOTHING To Do With His "Offensive Behaviour"
<<
<
1 of 5
>>
>
Musick1
29-05-2015
Big Brother really has hit an all time low this year!
The ejection of Aaron was a blatant attempt to lure viewers in to watching tonight's live "4 In 4 Out" special.
Aaron's ejection from the house really had nothing to do with his behaviour .. It had EVERYTHING to do with tonight's live show & BB producers used Aaron as a scapegoat to promote tonight's show! They know headlines work & ultimitally will attract some more viewers. C'mon, how many people will be curious to know what the aftermath is to last nights show.
Watching last nights show they tried to paint Aaron as some sort of sexual predator that you should fear "watch out people, Aaron might flash you in the park". The reality of the situation is that we had a male who got incredibly drunk & looked like an idiot on tv. Following his ejection he's now viewed as some sort of sexual pervert who flashes men - this opinion is what will be associated with Aaron because of his ejection.
Had BB given him a warning the next morning I can guarantee "the incident" would have become a classic BB moment, similar to Kenga in the garden or Jade sitting naked on the couch during a game of strip poker in BB3.

I wasn't Aaron's biggest fan but BB have honestly messed with his life which is so so sad.

I guess they really will mess with lives to get an extra few viewers.
I wish Aaron well, the guy needs massive support after this, I really hope viewers can understand how BB manipulate situations and lives!!

What do you think? Did his ejection take place in order to attract viewers for their bottom of the barrel "4In 4Out" special!!
wallster
29-05-2015
I think you make a good point. I doubt if I'll watch tonight. I was so sickened with the way Aaron was treated that it may be time to switch off.
Astute
29-05-2015
Did you watch last night ?
Philip_Clarke
29-05-2015
Hmm, This is the first civillian series I've watched since the Pete Bennett one. I'm starting to see why.
BB is famous for its double standards and it just get's more ridiculous.
in BBS Brian Dowling ran about naked and stayed in. in CBB Rylan Clark was naked at the windows in the garden, he stayed in. Aaron was ejected. er.....
dollyponduk
29-05-2015
Aaron was out of order and an official warning was all that was needed. They have clearly gone off their cast and are looking for an excuse to start again with different people. Kinga and Bianca were not ejected so this is sex discrimination surely?
wallster
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by Philip_Clarke:
“Hmm, This is the first civillian series I've watched since the Pete Bennett one. I'm starting to see why.
BB is famous for its double standards and it just get's more ridiculous.
in BBS Brian Dowling ran about naked and stayed in. in CBB Rylan Clark was naked at the windows in the garden, he stayed in. Aaron was ejected. er.....”

Exactly. Even a warning to Aaron would have been OTT, but to evict him brings up all sorts of questions about prejudice and Big Brother.
zelda fan
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by wallster:
“I think you make a good point. I doubt if I'll watch tonight. I was so sickened with the way Aaron was treated that it may be time to switch off.”

I really do think BB on CH5 have gone too far over the years, enough is enough we the viewers should stop watching to teach them a lesson.
yogacats
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by Musick1:
“
What do you think? Did his ejection take place in order to attract viewers for their bottom of the barrel "4In 4Out" special!!”


No - he was drunk, acted the idiot, the others egged him on, he went too far - end of story.
KT_Dog
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by Musick1:
“Had BB given him a warning the next morning I can guarantee "the incident" would have become a classic BB moment, similar to Kenga in the garden or Jade sitting naked on the couch during a game of strip poker in BB3!”

What I can guarantee is that if they had simply given him a warning the reaction would have been, "But Jeremy flashed Chloe... Once... Without build up... And he was evicted! Double standards much?"

A precedent has been set. You can't unset it now. From two years ago onwards if you deliberately flash someone you will be evicted.
KT_Dog
29-05-2015
Re my above comment... I literally posted that and then instantly remembered that wasn't the situation with jeremy and Chloe at all was it? Apologies.
fredster
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by wallster:
“Exactly. Even a warning to Aaron would have been OTT, but to evict him brings up all sorts of questions about prejudice and Big Brother.”

People complained about Helen and Conor getting away with murder, when they decide to make an example of Aron for anti social behaviour posters are up in arms....
Musick1
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by dollyponduk:
“Aaron was out of order and an official warning was all that was needed. They have clearly gone off their cast and are looking for an excuse to start again with different people. Kinga and Bianca were not ejected so this is sex discrimination surely?”

You're so right! I bet if they could they'd start again with a new batch of HMs but that would be extremely obvious that they messed up. Instead they've opted to eject half the cast/HMs to make it less obvious.
Oooh BB we know what your at! This isn't a "twist" at all this is you guys starting over again!!!
Good luck with it! It probably needs to happen to save the series to be honest but again BB continue to fk up!
James Frederick
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by KT_Dog:
“What I can guarantee is that if they had simply given him a warning the reaction would have been, "But Jeremy flashed Chloe... Once... Without build up... And he was evicted! Double standards much?"

A precedent has been set. You can't unset it now. From two years ago onwards if you deliberately flash someone you will be evicted.”

And as I have said in other threads since CBB 2015 (Well C5) is under new onwership just because some past show runners may have let some people get away with stuff doesn't mean Viacom will.
wallster
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by fredster:
“People complained about Helen and Conor getting away with murder, when they decide to make an example of Aron for anti social behaviour posters are up in arms....”

"anti social behaviour "

Did you watch last night?
Scarlett Berry
29-05-2015
It had everything to do with his appalling behaviour...everything
docman
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by fredster:
“People complained about Helen and Conor getting away with murder, when they decide to make an example of Aron for anti social behaviour posters are up in arms....”

Exactly, the point isn't whether Aaron should have been removed, the point is that the handling is NOT consistent or fair. If Aaron should have been removed, which is fair, then so should Bianca have been for rubbing her fanny on the male housemates last year.
Annsyre
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by James Frederick:
“And as I have said in other threads since CBB 2015 (Well C5) is under new onwership just because some past show runners may have let some people get away with stuff doesn't mean Viacom will.”

Good point.
Musick1
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by KT_Dog:
“What I can guarantee is that if they had simply given him a warning the reaction would have been, "But Jeremy flashed Chloe... Once... Without build up... And he was evicted! Double standards much?"

A precedent has been set. You can't unset it now. From two years ago onwards if you deliberately flash someone you will be evicted.”

If I remember correctly he didn't flash her he attempted to undo her gown to see her breast. There was an attempt to grab her. Slight difference!
Also context is key! Chloe was in a vunrable position, alone in the bathroom with Jeremy.

Aaron & Joel were in the bedroom surrounded by the HMs! At no point was Joel in danger! He was however in a situation that he shouldn't have been in. I think the situations are very different.
Annsyre
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by yogacats:
“No - he was drunk, acted the idiot, the others egged him on, he went too far - end of story.”

And tonight his name will disappear from page one of the threads.
Astute
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by KT_Dog:
“What I can guarantee is that if they had simply given him a warning the reaction would have been, "But Jeremy flashed Chloe... Once... Without build up... And he was evicted! Double standards much?"

A precedent has been set. You can't unset it now. From two years ago onwards if you deliberately flash someone you will be evicted.”



The flashing is one issue

The more serious issue is deliberately and persistently physically pursuing someone and "getting in their face" which is an act of aggression, no matter what excuses you offer ex post facto.

This is exacerbated by the fact that the "victim" has indicated both verbally and physically (by retreating) that it is unwelcome.

This was made even worse by the fact that this is a confined environment and he had nowhere to go to escape this .

Its not just about flashing
James Frederick
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by Musick1:
“If I remember correctly he didn't flash her he attempted to undo her gown to see her breast. There was an attempt to grab her. Slight difference!
Also context is key! Chloe was in a vunrable position, alone in the bathroom with Jeremy.

Aaron & Joel were in the bedroom surrounded by the HMs! At no point was Joel in danger! He was however in a situation that he shouldn't have been in. I think the situations are very different.”

Aaron grabbed Joel as well that's when BB stepped in.
shelleyj89
29-05-2015
It had EVERYTHING to do with his behaviour as he wouldn't have been kicked out otherwise. I don't know how people can continue to excuse what he did and blame it on everyone but him.
TheElf
29-05-2015
While I do not think Aaron's conduct was acceptable - I do think the OP raises a very good & valid point.

I feel like the ejection was unfair & a lot of the reactions to the incident are a little over the top.

What about Harriet, who actually shoved Aaron at Joel, why is she not ejected? What about the others who were cheering, laughing & whooping away in encouragement?

I hope Aaron is ashamed of his drunken behaviour but I sincerely hope this doesn't tarnish his life.
Philip_Clarke
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by Philip_Clarke:
“Hmm, This is the first civillian series I've watched since the Pete Bennett one. I'm starting to see why.
BB is famous for its double standards and it just get's more ridiculous.
in BBS Brian Dowling ran about naked and stayed in. in CBB Rylan Clark was naked at the windows in the garden, he stayed in. Aaron was ejected. er.....”

The point being two of them were given jobs and the other treated like crap.
Philip_Clarke
29-05-2015
Originally Posted by Musick1:
“If I remember correctly he didn't flash her he attempted to undo her gown to see her breast. There was an attempt to grab her. Slight difference!
Also context is key! Chloe was in a vunrable position, alone in the bathroom with Jeremy.

Aaron & Joel were in the bedroom surrounded by the HMs! At no point was Joel in danger! He was however in a situation that he shouldn't have been in. I think the situations are very different.”

Totally agree. The two cannot be compared.
<<
<
1 of 5
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map